Iwasaki Sangyo Co (Aus) Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Resource Management

Iwasaki Sangyo Co (Aus) Pty Ltd sought judicial review of a decision by the Chief Executive of the Department of Environment and Resource Management. The applicant contested the issuance of a property map of assessable vegetation (PMAV) that included areas classified as category A. According to the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (Qld), such classification is permissible if there is a reasonable belief that a vegetation clearing offence was being or had been committed. The Chief Executive reviewed the decision and issued a notice with an amended PMAV, reducing the number and size of the category A areas. The applicant challenged this decision before the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).

The central issue before QCAT was whether the direction by a Tribunal member, to hear the review proceeding with reference to a new PMAV, was an alteration of the review decision into an original decision, thus exceeding QCAT's jurisdiction. The applicant argued that this amounted to an impermissible change. In contrast, the respondent maintained that the direction was procedural and did not constitute a substantive change to the review decision.

In deciding the matter, QCAT found that the direction was procedural and did not exceed the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal held that the direction was not an alteration of the substantive review decision but rather a procedural step to ensure the review was conducted with the most up-to-date information. Consequently, QCAT refused the applicant's application for leave to appeal and awarded costs against the applicant.

The final orders of the court were that the application for leave to appeal was refused, and costs were awarded against the applicant.